PDA

View Full Version : Keep Our Web Free Propaganda!



mojo
12-05-2009, 08:56 PM
Since i doubt Bill would allow me to post this at ATS, or if i was allowed to post it at ATS the thread would be inundated with socks and sycophants.
First this is the site Bill has set up in response to the "third party cookie" legislation.

http://keepourwebfree.org/index.html


You may alsolink to us (http://keepourwebfree.org/link.html)to help spread the word about this effort on your own website, or the blogs and discussion boards you visit


I wonder if the link backs somehow profit ATS in some way? Valid question i think, considering this.

http://keepourwebfree.org/about.html


My involvement on this particular issue is multi-facted as the CEO of The Above Network, LLC, a former advertising executive, member of the Internet Advertising Bureau, and developer of early web technologies. Today, I'm fortunate enough to be one of the few people able to work hard and derive income from something that is a great personal passion for me: freedom of expression through user-generated content online.
This website, and the information contained, is for all those users and web site owners with a similar passion for the independent web. While it is essentially my personal project, the funding to make it happen is supplied by The Above Network, LLC.


And this remark is completely disingenious.


I agree that it is likely that some level of legislative action will be required to ensure more online advertising networks operate ethically. While there has been no documented case of inappropriate privacy intrusion,


There is a shitload of documented evidence of ad networks intruding into user privacy. I'm not sure how Bill can make this comment and keep a straight face.

Nebuad and Coupons.com are two examples that immediately spring to mind.


But I believe that, once the users of the independent web are fully informed about this issue, there will be an overwhelming demand for a different solution than the virtual elimination of third-party ad networks.


OK, so i agree that there needs to be a solution, as long as any different solution should always require user confirmation or an "opt in".
Otherwise the nefarious or unethical will always have a backdoor.

Here's another piece of creative spin.

http://keepourwebfree.org/cookies.html


If you use anti-virus or other anti-malware scanning software on your computer,
it has been telling you lies. Each time the software alerts you to an "intrusion" related to cookies from website, it is deceiving you in an apparent effort to ensure you keep using the software.


OK.....so anti-virus or malware software is continually lying to us, but there is no "documented" cases of ad-networks invading our privacy. You can't have it both ways Bill, there are either unethical intrusions and lies being told to us by both the anti-virus firms and the ad networks or they are both squeaky clean.


The profiling, referred to as behavioral targeting, is one of the primary reasons privacy advocates are concerned. While there's good reason to be concerned, no one has provided an actual case of where the profiling and targeting of online advertising has resulted in a problematic invasion of privacy, or inappropriate use of the profile data. Since the cookie contains no personal data, and the ad networks do not collect personal data, the targeting profile has no idea who you really are.


The problem as i see it is that it would seem to be fairly simple for them to find out exactly who you are for exactly those reasons. A file can be compiled because they can tell that you are a repeat visitor to multiple websites.

Whenever i visit certain sites, as most people would know, i can be specifically targeted with ads specific to the town in which i live.
It doesn't take much deduction from there for the technologically savvy, either within the Ad networks to discover exactly who i am and where i live.

"the targeting profile has no idea who you really are".

As an example i visited a site the other day that i am not nor have i ever been a member of, at the bottom of the page i received a pop-up message that said "Hi Mark, Angie in Adelaide would love to talk to you, click here to chat".

How did it know my name and where i lived.
Third party cookies thats how.
How can i be sure. Simple, delete your cookies and return to the same site and i don't receive an identifiably personal message.


No one will argue that we need strict controls regarding the collection and use of data which is the result of your web browsing. Ethical business practices tend to become widespread only after legislative action. However, Representative Boucher's proposed legislation is akin to repairing a slightly rotted wallboard with liberal amounts of gasoline and a flame-thrower.


Hah.....and that description is as sensational as the proposed legislation.
While i agree the legislation is less than perfect i'd argue that it at least attempts to solve what i believe is a serious issue, the invasion of a persons personal privacy.
Unfortunately, as has been proved time and time again, private business and conglomerates cannot be trusted to make ethical decisions, they make decisions based on the "bottom line", as you well know. (The GFC anyone)


We should all be very concerned about the growth of data mining within many institutions.

Data mining is the process of extracting patterns from data. As more data are gathered, with the amount of data doubling every three years,[1] (http://amkon.net/l%20cite_note-0) data mining is becoming an increasingly important tool to transform these data into information. It is commonly used in a wide range of profiling practices (http://amkon.net/wiki/Profiling_practices), such as marketing (http://amkon.net/wiki/Marketing), surveillance (http://amkon.net/wiki/Surveillance), fraud (http://amkon.net/wiki/Fraud) detection and scientific discovery.


Third party cookies do capture identifiable information about your surfing habits. This information can and is saved, kept,compiled and continually updated. Maybe not by everyone or all institutions but to suggest that some institutions or people are not at the very least trying to accumulate and collect this sort of data is the height of ignorance.
He who controls information controls the marketplace and by proxy controls the revenue stream, and this is exactly what any Ad network worth it's salt would require as one of it's prime objectives.

theeindiee
12-05-2009, 08:59 PM
It's alive!

hp
12-05-2009, 09:43 PM
Ya, it's BS. Obvious a person using it to make money will side with the cause. The ad people seem to imply they have certain rights, like personalizing your ads.

They can do some thing to entice people to join into the ad crap. Every body want easy money. The more this goes on the more I vote for screwing the ad people.

mojo
12-05-2009, 09:52 PM
i just don't like the disingenious way bill is using his own users for what is quite obviously a personal agenda and spinning the information to paint ad networks as the downtrodden.
would he allow a petition to be publicised on ats dealing with the decriminilization of cannabis, or a petition to indite the scumbags that intiated the GFC.
i doubt it, but he's willing to throw his weight behind a movement that would allow "advertising agencies" and their "partners" (accel and in-q-tel to name a couple) to continue to have little or no regulation regarding the compilation of information that used properly could be used nefariously.

hp
12-05-2009, 10:11 PM
Big publicity of this may actually hurt the ad cause. I suspect more people would be agin as to fer.

mojo
12-05-2009, 10:38 PM
agreed.
at least those that are able to think about it logically.

MrPenny
12-05-2009, 10:53 PM
ATS is trying to turn the membership into its own PAC......and many of the numbnut membership thinks this is a fine thing....

skunk
12-06-2009, 12:23 AM
What happened to GLP's PAC?

P.S. Great thread mojo :D

pack3tg0st
12-06-2009, 12:36 AM
I'm completely torn on this issue...

I think the web should be completely unregulated...

But I despise how ad companies operate...

and at the same time... Telling bill he shouldn't post that kinda shit on his website... is in a way demanding censorship...

But the hypocrisy...

LOL I dunno if I"m much help

Cogburn
12-06-2009, 01:34 AM
BAN INTERNET ADVERTISING!

KEEP THE INTERNET FREE!
(from spying)

pack3tg0st
12-06-2009, 01:39 AM
see... thats where I'm stuck cog lol

I hate advertising... but banning it is censorship...

the internet should be free...

but is it really free if you're demanding censorship?

(yes, I'm aware of the two meanings of the word free I just used lol)

anyway.. that's where I'm torn really...

I don't know... hard to resolve for me I guess

Cogburn
12-06-2009, 01:47 AM
It is not the advertising that is being blocked, it is the demographic tracking that is done in accordance with that advertising to measure its effectiveness.

You want to slap some corporate logo on your site and give them free publicity, that's fine, however you may not profit from the transfer of my private browsing habits. You may not install software on my computer without my express permission and consent, period.

This doesn't limit freedom, it protects it.

mojo
12-06-2009, 02:47 AM
... Telling bill he shouldn't post that kinda shit on his website... is in a way demanding censorship...



im not telling him he can't post it....im telling him its bullshit.
how is that censorship?

i should be the sole arbiter of what i choose to have on my computer, not some corporate conglomerate.

Cogburn
12-06-2009, 04:29 AM
Third-Party Ad Networks
For independent web sites, third-party ad networks function as an outsourced advertising sales and fulfillment department. Thousands of relationships are formed with a host of advertisers and advertising agencies, a task well-beyond the handful of people that typically run independent sites. This economy of scale makes it possible for thousands of different ads, all with their own schedule and budget, to be placed and ad revenue earned. Most of the ad networks utilize tracking cookies that retain anonymous non-personal data, but enable the tracking of the sites you visit and the ads delivered, so as to improve the mixture of banner ads seen.

The legislation proposed from Representative Boucher will, in its current state, eliminate third-party ads from independent web sites, thereby killing the only viable source of revenue. If that were to happen, those ad dollars would shift to the remaining big corporate media web sites who all have sufficient in-house technology and sales forces to accommodate direct relationships with advertisers. With one fell-swoop of legislation, the Internet would witness a seismic shift of catastrophic proportions, silencing the independent spirit that birthed the web, and giving an overwhelmingly unfair advantage to big media.

BULLSHIT LIES

The number of ways to create an opt-in selection on the initial visit to your website is infinite.

What is at issue is the simple fact that 3rd parties are privy to my activities on the internet without my consent.

That "thousands of relationships" spiel is just pure nonsense: you make a deal with 2 or 3 add networks and then they take care of the rest. Who the fuck hasn't used Commission Junction or like sites before?

Bill is assuming that everyone on the internet is as much of a fucking moron as the regular visitors to ATS.

LOLCats? The ORLY bird? Are you fucking serious?

4chan and SomethingAwful are the originators of much of those images that you parade around your website as "free content".

Some Independent Web Sites

FilmQ.com
PrescriptionDrug-Info.com
FindAnyFloor.com
PrimaryGames.com
Forward Health
Providence Publications, LLC
Savetz Publishing
ADZOOMI
Friendseat.com
AmericaFree.TV
GreenwichMeanTime.com
Selling 2.0
Argela-USA
HomeShopr
SheZoom
AskTheBuilder.com
HowStuffWorks
ShowMeTheCurry.com
Baisden Media Group
IKEA Fans
Belgica Srl
InflectionPointMedia.com
Social Knowledge
BLiNQ Media
Interactive Internet Websites, Inc.
Spiceworks
Blue Sky Publications
Intercot.com
Studio4Learning.tv
BuddyGolf.Net
Jason Connors Websites Inc.
Sunrise Broadcasting
Carolina Rustica
Surfnetkids.com, Inc.
Charles and Hudson
Metromojo
The Above Network, LLC
Coaches Aid Corp
Milabra
The Kakadu Trading Company
Community Powered Media
MindTheater.net
TopTenReviews, Inc.
Condo.com
Mother Jones Magazine
Toucan Limited
ConsumerAffairs.com, Inc.
mPoint
TV Guide Magazine
CreativePro
Muxlim
DailyMe, Inc
MUZU.TV
tyBit, Inc.
Daryn Kagan
neomaxcom, LLC
VegSource
Destructoid
Oddpodz
Wikia, Inc.
Ebeisbol.com
Papa Coyne
WiseBread
PetStyle
WiseGeek.com
Elfster
Phluant Mobile
Yabsta (BVI) Limited
Family Travel Forum
PickupPal Inc.
Yellow Peril Media LLC
Far Hills Media LLC
Pixazza
FertilityAuthority.com
PremiumChannels.com

Nope... don't see either one listed. Nice attribution, you fat, hypocritical fucktard.

http://forums.somethingawful.com/

Oh look... if you join the SA forums the advertising goes away, just like ATS.

http://www.4chan.org/

Oh look... they have advertising, too.

... and these are the sites whose content Bill decides to rip off in order to prove his point, and then doesn't even have the decency to include them in his fight.

What a fucking disingenuous asshole.

I'm sick of this asshole... Really sick of this asshole.

Eyeforalie
12-06-2009, 04:34 AM
Pac, I understand what youre saying but I see it somewhat like the 'virus legality' issue. Viruses have the ability to be created and spread, but not all are designed to do harm. It should be legal to design and teach to design, and even distribute as creative property but not be used with malicious intent.

IMO, Its fine to have a free and open Internet, even install software, as long as isn't by any means malicious. The fact that the ad companies would be using the information to exploit without regard for demographic would be enough to fall into the "malicious" category. Mojos point of someone with foul intent being able to obtain an use that information to potentially harm an individual with few, if any, safeguards is an excellent point also.

I don't believe the net should be ad free. Its too hard to define what advertising is without having a large gray area. The line should be drawn at using cookies or other gathered data via non-volunteer based sources on the internet to customize ads.

hp
12-06-2009, 10:39 AM
Some of the comments on the petition are quite sad.

hp
12-06-2009, 10:59 AM
see... thats where I'm stuck cog lol
I hate advertising... but banning it is censorship...
...


No bans, just how it is being implemented.

A company wants to paint an ad on your house instead of a billboard.

Guess every one can refuse the 3rd party cookies and they will have to design a new method anyway.

Wonder how many 'ad haters' at Bill's have signed the petition.

pack3tg0st
12-06-2009, 11:00 AM
see eye... I get your point... and its right along with mine... with just one little difference: Personal Responsibility.

Security has never been a convenience under any circumstances...

In my Net-utopia, the tracking cookies are out there, as is the right of the programmer... BUT, the masses actually take the responsibility of basic security on themselves...

opt-in? who cares... it takes 2 seconds to swap your browser over to ask you if you want a cookie every time one is offered...

Why are we removing the personal responsibilty out of the equation...

If I leave 100 bucks on the sidewalk, I can hardly be suprised when its missing an hour later...

People learned the basics of 'home security' by locking their doors when they leave for any length of time...

Why do they refuse to learn the basics of net security?

hp
12-06-2009, 11:08 AM
http://homingpigeon.com/xfer/nomatter.jpg

hp
12-06-2009, 11:16 AM
Pack, I basically agree. The ads are just becoming so much like spam. I personally get suspicious of and tend to boycott the stuff I see advertised in this manner.

The ad dudes might do better to develop a reward program (bogus of course) and try to get better targets of the ads. Paying because I loaded a page is a waste of money about 99.999% of the time in my case.

If I search up a site looking for a product I am be more open minded to the idea of checking it out.

hp
12-06-2009, 11:19 AM
But then Bill says you have to look at the ads to visit his site. I can imagine changes to block visits that do not conform (blocking, etc). I suppose that is the right of the site. Just bog down the whole page loading experience.

Cogburn
12-06-2009, 04:00 PM
... then AdBlock releases a new version so that it downloads the content, but doesn't render it on the screen, making any sort of block detection impossible...

... and the game continues ...

hp
12-06-2009, 04:12 PM
But the download counts for the site if it is just impressions.

Cogburn
12-06-2009, 04:35 PM
I'm not so much concerned about that. Go ahead and let them have the impression.

Remember when I ordered that pizza online? For days afterwards I was flashed Domino's pizza banners on random websites I visited.

That needs to stop.

mojo
12-07-2009, 01:29 AM
Some of the comments on the petition are quite sad.

not just Sad....they are fucking hilarious. I mean seriously 50% of the people who have signed it have no fucking idea what they are signing.

check out this gem.


373.Richard J. Clifford: What the hell does the Congress think it's doing?! Making us pay for material that used to be free?! I won't have it! I want this bill stopped! Keep the web free and open to all!

Hahahahahahahahahaha.........i mean really.

Some other dude wrote a comment about not taxing the internet.

If anyone in the govt actually takes the time to read the petition they will possible die in fits of laughter.

hp
12-07-2009, 01:42 AM
Yep, some of those comments make the signer look less than aware. No wonder these politicians see no need in respecting what the average person thinks or says. If it were my petition I would be embarrassed to send it.